[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250311133736.12846D42-hca@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 14:37:36 +0100
From: Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Jeff Xu <jeffxu@...omium.org>,
"Liam R . Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>,
Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.de>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>, Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH mm-unstable 0/2] mseal system mappings fix + s390
enablement
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 01:02:47PM +0000, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 01:33:24PM +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > When rebasing the mseal series on top of the generic vdso data storage
> > the VM_SEALED_SYSMAP vm flag for the vvar mapping got lost. Add that again.
>
> I'm confused by this? Some merge patch resolution thing?
See my other mail.
> > Also add s390 support for MSEAL_SYSTEM_MAPPINGS.
>
> 'Also' = the whole thing this series does?
>
> Can you confirm that s390 absolutely does not rely upon
> moving/manipulating/etc. the VDSO, VVAR, etc. mappings?
>
> You should say that here.
Just like for arm64, and x86_64 the s390 part is just adding the new
vm flag to the _install_mappings() call in vdso code. Otherwise there
is nothing to be considered.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists